Newer translations have made two Newer translations have made two important contributions to Bible study.important contributions to Bible study.

More reliable textMore reliable text More readily understoodMore readily understood

The Need for Accuracy in The Need for Accuracy in TranslationTranslation

Problems that confront Problems that confront translatorstranslators

Saying the same thing in another Saying the same thing in another language does not always mean using language does not always mean using the same words in the same number.the same words in the same number.

but indeed also with all these things but indeed also with all these things third this day is leading since which third this day is leading since which these things came about,” (a literal these things came about,” (a literal word by word translation of Lk. word by word translation of Lk. 24:21).24:21).

Languages often Languages often differdiffer

The structure of the language is The structure of the language is different.different.• Syntax or word order is often different.Syntax or word order is often different.• Verb tenses are not identical (more or less)Verb tenses are not identical (more or less)

Ways of expressing things are different.Ways of expressing things are different. Cultural differencesCultural differences

• All languages have “dead metaphors and All languages have “dead metaphors and similes”. similes”.

• Cultures often use different standards of Cultures often use different standards of weight, measure and monetary exchange.weight, measure and monetary exchange.

The literal or formal The literal or formal equivalence methodequivalence method

A literal translation seeks a word-for-A literal translation seeks a word-for-word equivalency, trying also to retain word equivalency, trying also to retain the grammatical structure of the original the grammatical structure of the original insofar as the destination language will insofar as the destination language will permit. This is the traditional method of permit. This is the traditional method of translation and adopts the source translation and adopts the source message as its control and seeks to message as its control and seeks to bring the contemporary reader back to bring the contemporary reader back to that point. It seeks to help the reader that point. It seeks to help the reader identify himself with a person in the identify himself with a person in the source-language context as fully as source-language context as fully as possible, teaching him the customs, possible, teaching him the customs, manner of thought, and means of manner of thought, and means of expression of the earlier time.expression of the earlier time.

Formal or literal Formal or literal translationstranslations

KJV—Authorized Version NKJV—New King James Version ASV—American Standard Version NASV—New American Standard

Bible NAV—New American Bible) RSV—Revised Standard Version ESV—English Standard Version

The dynamic equivalence or The dynamic equivalence or functional equivalence methodfunctional equivalence method

““Dynamic equivalence” is defined as Dynamic equivalence” is defined as “the quality of a translation in which the “the quality of a translation in which the message of the original text has been so message of the original text has been so transported into the receptor language transported into the receptor language that the response of the receptor is that the response of the receptor is essentially like that of the original essentially like that of the original receptors.” The new aim is to relate the receptors.” The new aim is to relate the text to the receptor and his modes of text to the receptor and his modes of behavior relevant within the context of behavior relevant within the context of his own culture, a controlling factor his own culture, a controlling factor called “the principle of equivalent called “the principle of equivalent effect.” With D-E, comprehension of the effect.” With D-E, comprehension of the patterns of the source-language culture patterns of the source-language culture is unnecessary. is unnecessary.

The dynamic equivalence The dynamic equivalence methodmethod

NIV—New International Version TEV—New Testament in

Today’s English Version (1966), Good News for Modern Man, Good News Bible (1976).

CEV—Contemporary English Version, under the title Bible for Today’s Family (1991)

The Paraphrasing methodThe Paraphrasing method

A literal translation tells what A literal translation tells what the passage says, whereas a the passage says, whereas a paraphrase tells the reader what paraphrase tells the reader what the passage means. the passage means.

ParaphrasesParaphrases

J. B. Phillips’s Letters to Young Churches (1947)

Kenneth S. Wuest’s Expanded Translation of the Greek New Testament (1956–59)

The Amplified Bible (1962) The Letters of Paul: An

Expanded Paraphrase (1965) by F.F. Bruce

Kenneth N. Taylor’s The Living Bible, Paraphrased (1971)

Evaluating the approachesEvaluating the approaches

Formal equivalenceFormal equivalence

+ The least amount of “change” to The least amount of “change” to the original wording. the original wording.

+ Presumably least likely to be Presumably least likely to be affected by translator’s biasaffected by translator’s bias

- Depends upon the reader getting Depends upon the reader getting information about idioms of the information about idioms of the original language and cultural original language and cultural background for figurative speechbackground for figurative speech

- Might not produce the most natural Might not produce the most natural EnglishEnglish

Dynamic equivalenceDynamic equivalence

+ Clears up meaningless idiomatic Clears up meaningless idiomatic expressionsexpressions

+ Adapts the message to modern Adapts the message to modern terms readily understood.terms readily understood.

- The more dependent we are upon The more dependent we are upon the judgment of scholars about what the judgment of scholars about what a Biblical writer meant, the more at a Biblical writer meant, the more at risk we may be to mistranslation or risk we may be to mistranslation or misinterpretation. misinterpretation.

ParaphrasesParaphrases

+ A possible resource for interpretationA possible resource for interpretation- Not truly a translation but an Not truly a translation but an

explanation of Scriptureexplanation of Scripture- Most often the product of one person Most often the product of one person

reflecting his doctrinal leaningsreflecting his doctrinal leanings

Which is better?Which is better?

For detailed and intensive study, For detailed and intensive study, especially in preparation for especially in preparation for teaching, a more literal translation teaching, a more literal translation would probably be best.would probably be best.

In working with children and those In working with children and those for whom English is a second for whom English is a second language, a dynamic equivalence language, a dynamic equivalence translation probably would be translation probably would be preferable. preferable.

In other contexts,—whether In other contexts,—whether personal devotions, family personal devotions, family devotions, meditation, or extended devotions, meditation, or extended reading—readers today have reading—readers today have available a rich variety of versions, available a rich variety of versions, and individuals can make their own and individuals can make their own judgments as to the most useful judgments as to the most useful version. But keep in mind that all version. But keep in mind that all translations may reflect theological translations may reflect theological bias.bias.

My personal choicesMy personal choices

Formal equivalence—NASVFormal equivalence—NASV Functional equivalence—NIVFunctional equivalence—NIV Paraphrase—J.B. Phillip’s Paraphrase—J.B. Phillip’s

ParaphraseParaphrase